Partner Compensation Plans – The Eat What You Kill, EWYK (Part 6 of 7)
This is the 6th article in a series of 7 discussing structures that law firms tend to adopt for partner compensation. In Part 1 we discussed the Monarch structure, in Part 2 the Parity structure, in Part 3 the Executive Committee Monarchy, in Part 4 the regular Lock Step, and in Part 5 the Modified Lock Step.
Description
Each lawyer’s compensation is based on the revenues she generates. Usually there is some kind of formula that attempts to account for overhead, and then distributes all remaining profits to the lawyers based on their collections. In some systems a flat dollar amount is determined for overhead per lawyer, by dividing up the sum of fixed and predictable expenses, such as rent and shared staff salaries. Everything the lawyer bills and collects in excess of the fixed overhead figure gets paid to that lawyer after subtracting certain firm expenses directly associated with that lawyer such as business development expenses, retirement plan contributions, and salaries of staff or associates who work mostly for that attorney. In that model the firm is more akin to an office sharing arrangement than a partnership.
A variation of the EWYK model does provide for sharing of risk. The firm’s profits are determined, and distributed in accordance with a formula that averages the collected revenues attributable to a partner over multiple years (usually two to four). The averaging slightly shaves off peaks in income, to provide […]
Partner Compensation Plans – The Modified Lock Step (Part 5 of 7)
This is the 5th article in a series of 7 discussing structures that law firms tend to adopt for partner compensation. In Part 1 we discussed the Monarch structure, in Part 2 the Parity structure, in Part 3 the Executive Committee Monarchy, and in Part 4 the regular Lock Step.
Modified Lock Step
Description
Many firms have modified the lock step model to allow a committee to subjectively reward or punish behavior. The modification helps the firm to encourage essential behaviors such as business development, high productivity, recruiting, training and mentoring associates, management, and client relationship maintenance. It also provides the flexibility to bring underperforming partners into line, without having to completely expel a partner.
Some of the modifications may include the ability to promote a partner to a higher level earlier than the other classmate partners, or demote a partner to a lower level. There may also be a “slush fund” for allocating bonuses to reward desired behavior. Appendix A to this article (which will appear in Part 7 of the seven-part series) contains an example of provisions that might be included in a modified lock step compensation plan. The author extends her gratitude to Bill McDonald, a partner at Thompson & Knight LLP, whose practice includes advice on law firm formation, for the provisions included in Appendix A.
In Appendix A, the agreement provides for seven lock step levels, but permits the management committee to assign […]
Partner Compensation Plans – Lock Step (Part 4 of 7)
This is the 4th article in a series of 7 discussing structures that law firms tend to adopt for partner compensation. In Part 1 we discussed the Monarch structure, in Part 2 the Parity structure, and in Part 3 the Executive Committee Monarchy.
Lock Step
Description
This model is used mainly in large, stable, well-established firms that have a lot of institutional clients. It rewards seniority. Usually, all of the lawyers who become partners in the same year are a class, and make the same compensation. The class as a whole receives an increase in points, which are the basis of allocating profit distributions, when they are elevated to the next level. Typically, the spread between the salary of the highest paid partners and the lowest paid partners is not that large – 3 or 4 to 1 is not uncommon.
When It Works Well […]
Partner Compensation Structures – Executive Committee Monarchy (Part 3 of 7)
This is the 3rd article in a series of 7 discussing the different kinds of partnership compensation structures that law firms tend to adopt. In Part 1 we discussed the Monarch structure, and in Part 2 the Parity structure.
Executive Committee Monarchy
Description
Both of the prior structures are usually only found in small firms of ten partners or fewer. In a larger firm, the Monarch structure may be expanded to a ruling executive committee. In this situation a rather stable and predictable executive committee functions like a single monarch. Usually they are the founding partners or otherwise the most experienced lawyers in the firm.
When It Works Well
This structure works when the […]
Partner Compensation Structures – Parity (Part 2 of 7)
This is the 2nd article in a series of 7 discussing the different kinds of partnership compensation structures that law firms tend to adopt. In Part 1 we discussed the Monarch structure which involves one partner who rules over the others on compensation issues.
Parity
Description
All of the partners split the profits of the firm evenly. This format usually comes out of a situation where two or three lawyers of similar vintage are friends, and decide to form a partnership.
When It Works Well
When the lawyers have […]
Partner Compensation Structures, A Seven Part Series – The Monarch (1 of 7)
Partner compensation, Law firm compensation, Compensation structures, partner compensation structure, shareholder compensation, The Monarch Structure